People v. Kislowski
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1DissentLynch, J.
Initially, we fully agree with the majority that the amended violation petition was facially deficient as to Patrick Lilly. We part ways with respect to Angela Nichols for two reasons. First, we find the amended violation petition also facially deficient as to Nichols. Pursuant to CPL 410.70 (2), “[t]he court must file or cause to be filed with the clerk of the court a statement setting forth the condition or conditions of the sentence violated and a reasonable description of the time, place and manner in which the violation occurred” (see People v York, 2 AD3d 1158, 1160 [2003]). The…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- People v. YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003